DeBolt v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal · Civ. No. 9983 · 1934-12-05 · Published · 2 Cal. App. 2d 619

Area: civil
Panel: Jess E. Stephens (author)

Analysis

No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.

Opinion

2 Cal.App.2d 619 (1934) ETHEL M. DeBOLT, Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY et al., Respondents.

Civ. No. 9983. California Court of Appeals. Second Appellate District, Division Two.

December 5, 1934. Charles M. Easton and Palmyra Pressly for Petitioner.

David W. Richards and Henry F. Poyet for Respondents.

Stephens, P. J.

[1] One of the defendants in an action which was decided adversely to her seeks by a petition in mandamus to have restored to her bill of exceptions upon appeal matters stricken therefrom by the trial court. Section 652 of the Code of Civil Procedure prescribes the procedure to be taken in such a case.

A peremptory writ denied.

Crail, J., and Scott, J., pro tem., concurred.

Cites, in this corpus

DeBolt v. Superior Court Civ. No. 9983 · 1934-12-05